Thank you. I assume, that while recalculating in this scenario I take into account the number of units already moved in the current initiative looser - initiative winner pair of movements (represented by a single line in the table on p. 39 TW).
The only potential issues I can see with this answer are as follows:
1. If the recalculation happens after player A moves his last unit before player B was supposed to move according to the sequence set before recalculating, do I say that the turn moves to the player B, and then recalculate the number of units to move, or do I recalculate first, and based on the results of this recalculation decide whose turn is it to move?
2. If one side can make multiple units appear on the battlefield during a single turn (they leave Dropship(s) with multiple doors for example), they may wait until they are about to move their last unit that started it's turn on the board, and then move all units that enter the battlefield.
An example of the first issue:
Player A has 4 units, and player B has 3 units. Player B wins the initiative, so the movement sequence is as follows:
A, B, A, B, A, A, B.
If during the move of the first player A's unit one of B's unit gets destroyed does the sequence change to:
A (already moved), A, B, A, A, B,
or
A (already moved), B, A, A, A, B?
The first sequence is obtained if the number of units to move is recalculated before the movement passes to B, and the second sequence is obtained if you first pass the movement passes to B, and then recalculate. To me the first way seems both more natural and more fair, but I'm not certain which one you mean.
The second issue could be quite severe, as I feel it could on occasion lead to significant abuse of the initiative system. Imagine a situation, when sides A and B each have 3 units on the ground map. B's units include two DropShips (which according to the first sentence of the Liftoff section on p.88 TW can liftoff during the Movement Phase (Ground), so I include them in the calculation). Both DropShips have two doors each, and are filled with 'Mechs or tanks, which can dismount using those doors. The way I see it if player B wins the initiative it could lead to the following sequence of moves:
A, B, A, B, A, B*, B*, B*, B*, B,
where B* are units exiting the DropShip. As you can in see in this scenario B can move most of his units after A finished moving all of his. To make things worse the first two units, that players B "moves" could be his DropShips (which just make a declaration, that they don't liftoff or taxi - likely trivial and predictable considering the situation), so A has to move all of his units before any truly mobile B's units do anything. I'm not certain if it should be allowed. To make matters even more complicated if in the above situation B looses the initiative the movement sequence may depend on how you rule in the first issue. Sequence B, A, B, A, B*, B*, B*, B*, B, A is possible if you first recalculate who has to move how many units, then pass the move to the other player. In the opposite situation it could be argued, that B can force a sequence B, A, B, A, B*, A, B*, B*, B*, B, which seems completely at odds with the general intent of the initiative rules, that the initiative winner always moves last (except the obvious situation when he looses all of his yet unmoved units during the initiative loser's move).
The second issue probably has so much to do with the topic on movement sequence issues with dismounting I posted in the Total Warfare subsection (the one I mentioned in the first sentence of this thread), that it probably should be answered there, but since it is already marked as being researched I don't know if I should add the reference to or quote this issue there or not, especially since it already touches problems with many rules spread through multiple rulebooks, so I guess adding more questions or examples to it would only add to confusion there.
